Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
Reading: all of Chapter 7, Chapter 8, sections 1-3.
Exercises: 7.12, 7.13, 7.17, 7.20, 8.3 (numbers 8 and 11 only).
Note: there is a typo in 7.12. I'm pretty sure the "5x5" matrix should be "10x10".
Exercises: 7.12, 7.13, 7.17, 7.20, 8.3 (numbers 8 and 11 only).
Note: there is a typo in 7.12. I'm pretty sure the "5x5" matrix should be "10x10".
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
For problem 7.12, since it is a five mass problem, don't we need 10 eigenvalues for the place() command?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
Yes. Just select more consistent with the given ones.ceramics wrote:For problem 7.12, since it is a five mass problem, don't we need 10 eigenvalues for the place() command?
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
Professor, using apparently only functions for A(nxn) and B(n) with n = 15 (returning an error past that):
[/color]
while is said to break down in accuracy past an order of 10, although it can actually compute the values without returning an error statement.
Should we, then, resort to a five-mass system as originally stated?
Code: Select all
place(A,B,P)
Code: Select all
??? Error using ==> place at 172
The "place" command could not place the poles at the specified locations. Probable causes include:
* (A,B) is nearly uncontrollable
* The specified locations are too close to each other.
while
Code: Select all
acker(A,B,P)
Should we, then, resort to a five-mass system as originally stated?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
Yes, 5 masses is ok.Adam W. wrote:Professor, usingapparently only functions for A(nxn) and B(n) with n = 15 (returning an error past that):Code: Select all
place(A,B,P)
[/color]Code: Select all
??? Error using ==> place at 172 The "place" command could not place the poles at the specified locations. Probable causes include: * (A,B) is nearly uncontrollable * The specified locations are too close to each other.
whileis said to break down in accuracy past an order of 10, although it can actually compute the values without returning an error statement.Code: Select all
acker(A,B,P)
Should we, then, resort to a five-mass system as originally stated?
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
If you have it, can you post the code that implemented the lqr command? Thanks.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
I'll get them posted tomorrow morning.sprender wrote:If you have it, can you post the code that implemented the lqr command? Thanks.
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
Done!goodwine wrote:I'll get them posted tomorrow morning.sprender wrote:If you have it, can you post the code that implemented the lqr command? Thanks.
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
For problem 7.12, do we include the forcing function sin(omega*t) with the stabilizing force?
i.e.,
i.e.,
Code: Select all
w = 0.25;
f = sin(w*t);
xdot = A*x + [0;(f+k1*x(1)+k2*x(2)+k3*x(3)+k4*x(4)+k5*x(5)+k6*x(6)+k7*x(7)+k8*x(8)+k9*x(9)+k10*x(10));0;0;0;0;0;0;0;0];
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
The design of the controller is only to stabilize the system, so the literal answer is no. It would be interesting to see if the controller reduces the effect of the applied force on the motion of the system, however.whawes wrote:For problem 7.12, do we include the forcing function sin(omega*t) with the stabilizing force?
i.e.,Code: Select all
w = 0.25; f = sin(w*t); xdot = A*x + [0;(f+k1*x(1)+k2*x(2)+k3*x(3)+k4*x(4)+k5*x(5)+k6*x(6)+k7*x(7)+k8*x(8)+k9*x(9)+k10*x(10));0;0;0;0;0;0;0;0];
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
For the second part of problem 17 (with damping), can we use a computer to solve for the eigenvalues and just report the normalized vectors in our answer?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
You only need to solve the case with damping numerically. You are to use the undamped cases as a guide since the damping is so light.sprender wrote:For the second part of problem 17 (with damping), can we use a computer to solve for the eigenvalues and just report the normalized vectors in our answer?
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
Where do the initial conditions fit in the place() function inputs, if anywhere?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1596
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:54 pm
- Location: 376 Fitzpatrick
- Contact:
Re: Homework 7, due March 9, 2011.
The place function specifies the eigenvalues, so it has nothing to do with initial conditions.vsteger wrote:Where do the initial conditions fit in the place() function inputs, if anywhere?
Bill Goodwine, 376 Fitzpatrick